Regarding the Keith Monks. I have an older KMAL and it has a motor for the thread and a motor for the arm. No motor for the fluid, just a plunger type pump to get the fluid to the cleaning wand. It works really well.
Kim
Kim
In the latest The Absolute Sound
I agree, the problem with Keith Monks and the Loricraft is the arm is left to gravity follow the LP (groove). If you have liquid near the label it gets caught in the run out groove and does not get picked up. The Loricraft PRC-3 is typically operated with the cleaning arm starting in the runout groove next to the label and moving toward the outside of the record. The pickup arms on Loricraft machines are driven by motor and not left to gravity. On mine I have never experienced liquid caught in the run out groove. The Monks has no motor for the string, no motor for the arm and no motor to deliver the cleaning fluid. I think the last one is correct and it is true the Loricraft asks one to turn the thread spool by hand to let out 5cm of new thread when beginning a new cleaning run. If not all, I believe at least some of the versions of the Keith Monks machines had thread take up motors, as shown in the picture of the linked Web page. The only regret I have about record cleaning machines is not having bought one sooner. The new German RCM sounds like it does it all. Now if we could only get coin-operated models installed at local laundromats. :-) Cheers, Tim |
Great responses here, looks like Keith Monks did build later versions with motor for the thread. The machine I knew and used locally did not have this feature and I (wrongly) assumed all designs continued in this same way. I also did not know the Loricraft had a motor powered arm. That motor is the force that keeps the arm from "sticking" in the run out groove and failing to pick up all the liquid. The Loricraft I played with in England while covering the audio show there was leaving fluid in the run out grooves and the arm offered no resistance to being moved by hand, unlike the Monks or my Odyssey RCM. So perhaps the biggest difference between these later versions is fluid pump for the new RCM and the vacuum gauge. Perhaps when I get the English language version of the owners manual I will understand it's features better. Meanwhile, it is by far the best LP cleaning machine I have ever used. The Keith Monks here locally may have done an equal quality job but my friend that owned it moved away, so I can't make a direct comparison. His machine had a hand pump (no motor). His also required moving the thread by hand. Perhaps this earlier models lacked this feature or perhaps this one was so old the motor was not functioning. Downunder: There is something wrong with the cleaning fluid or the VPI RCM?? ABSOLUTELY NOT, I used my VPI 17F for many, many years and my record library was improved both sonically and with superior signal to noise. Perhaps my dedication to the 17F is what caused me to go so crazy for the German RCM. The RCM is indeed better than my VPI and by a good margin. My nitty gritty used with the pure 2 I think actually removes all static and debris from my records. Are you using the Nitty Gritty machine or the VPI? I can't tell from your question. On the topic of fluids, I no longer use Nitty Gritty, or the Disc Doctor because I tested and preferred the sonic character (or lack thereof) of the Record Research fluids. Unfortunately, Record Research is much more prone to static build up when used with the VPI 17F (due to it's pick up tube) and I think that's because Record Research leaves nothing behind to "treat" the LP. That's good from a sonic standpoint and bad from the static standpoint. Fortunately, the system used by Keith Monks, Loricraft and Odyssey RCM all avoid the static problem, providing superior cleaning over the Nitty Gritty and all VPI machines while avoiding the static issue. |